Watts article

[jbor]

>> You've decided that Pynchon has made up these quotes, on no other basis than
>> that you don't think the way the speakers are speaking is authentic, or
>> "good", enough.
> 
> No other basis?   How many times do I need to point out to you that my basis
> is that they cannot be authentic as used.   One cannot attribute a direct
> quote to "they."   One cannot attribute a direct quote to what one is likely
> to hear.   Such attributions can be nothing other than inauthentic.

I understand your argument. I disagree with it, and have explained why, many
times. In the article there are direct quotations which are assigned to
individuals ("a kid says", "a counsellor recalls"); there are other direct
quotations which are given more general attribution ("others", "they",
"you'll hear"); and then there are descriptions and extended scenarios where
Pynchon is apparently paraphrasing or embellishing on what he's been told.
The use of speech marks distinguishes between the direct quotes and the
paraphrases. Every usage of "man" (for emphasis), "baby" and "cats" in the
article occurs within the direct quotations (i.e. within inverted commas, as
part of attributed speech).

Addressing his reader, Pynchon writes:

    "You are likely to hear from them wisdom on the order
    of: 'Life has a way of surprising us, simply as a
    function of time. Even if all you do is stand on the
    street corner and wait.'"

In other words, if "you" (the reader) ever do go to Watts and talk to the
people there, you're "likely to hear" this sort of comment, *because it's a
comment I heard and am quoting to you now*.

Attributing a direct quotation to more than one person is not as outrageous
as you are making out. It's easy to imagine the process: in collecting
material for the article he has been contracted to write Pynchon goes to
Watts and speaks to various individuals and groups of locals, perhaps even
tapes these exchanges. When speaking with a group one of them says something
with which the rest of the group expresses agreement, so Pynchon
incorporates the quote verbatim and attributes it as the sentiment of the
whole group. That seems to me a more straightforward way to read Pynchon's
use of direct quotation, consensus attributions, and black slang in the
article rather than asserting, over and over again and without evidence,
that he made it all up.

best